Re: [DNSOP] [internet-drafts@ietf.org] New Version Notification for draft-hardaker-dnsop-intentionally-temporary-insec-00.txt

Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com> Thu, 25 February 2021 19:14 UTC

Return-Path: <bemasc@google.com>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 383983A1EB8 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:14:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hs4RxHBfBfBa for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:14:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io1-xd30.google.com (mail-io1-xd30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8E1F3A1EB7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:14:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io1-xd30.google.com with SMTP id s24so7071401iob.6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:14:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VqFmdGkjZO6OPmJpT5NCDtD9HfXx7CzgAab+L7kK6sc=; b=HzVmXKAER5up2K4l4jwWj0p85XTPfBuup9DwWUVdIM/+n/FDyRbwiRkI9KTi3cBO74 ktmjVUxiSeTZRiBZpnyDw7dPn7UBq1lnWMPj2tMZubI+8rU/3PxKP5A86lE8Lr6vHEJE szbVf8RXMaVcn7ND6quQJOdrwwUn2Npcwab4kL7+TfLM3/7O43k8dZsxy+hzYZbruC26 0vs66nldA+wNuimwozq9RvbHEGhqBYSWHrD/EHJP+FKgfVrxDHvTKFX1OmZ8BzEZ9URC Sq52GoCjr84dABy1qnB7gY2KfeMsDQb6ihMLdzQqK21W+7gg351gH1zbrbTlOkRru3ZP P1aA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VqFmdGkjZO6OPmJpT5NCDtD9HfXx7CzgAab+L7kK6sc=; b=mvDBBDM7MpmDS77SOTKtQRCns0OfAiWniYjjoNnlH3pvdP7zR2vLm1luIQ95rBo3/p yz5vgRqtuNbervqXtxmm88C3gzARZygyIMLMfZL8IOV91oV8vy0W8NI7KihxQfO8/5M9 IgJJIKBEqi91DATf7giiDGO1PZOH3sbw19bQw6fIvO9rFjds03bJrJP00mNVJ6AOv7Ur QgdOX68rl8HTEz9BAzp0diPOD8PddqppDFhA2G2tLXn6Bsevv/Z2O/Sjcqh+ETf8gQV/ Qvx0N9vucEwL/D5d4Ih0ZHKhWqjsKokOpMjfJri2MQZ1Kin/QBCfFMZclmnxgFBU1QPa WjpA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531aJghIGbawJtjxWmAlX7rUt3okVhNkg5CAAhQqyZtCmkI2yxHO AWkqfzNX2bg849GGNKM+FuOxTaw6UcbAqAis6bAzSw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyhPYM5a4P0Alk+HDXIjCRjcgnZHgac5JWspgVJFkKslYDzIzlXK5siFcxV1Ppmf1mdu1pBcGBwbROkaGizrSI=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:be86:: with SMTP id o128mr3764487iof.111.1614280441617; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:14:01 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <yblzgzxceqt.fsf@w7.hardakers.net> <e6cf46e1-b88f-e5c1-d30e-ed8045ec76fe@nic.cz> <CAHbrMsBAZEL7_E8rJ8wWQ17679xJeeHaJkk-POEbELNT55=UOw@mail.gmail.com> <yblpn0o9eck.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
In-Reply-To: <yblpn0o9eck.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
From: Ben Schwartz <bemasc@google.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 14:13:50 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHbrMsDTi6NCVfVr6HqnN6Z3nHo6qkWohkR8YaU1JyEjrYtdOA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
Cc: =?UTF-8?B?VmxhZGltw61yIMSMdW7DoXQ=?= <vladimir.cunat+ietf@nic.cz>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="00000000000050220605bc2df407"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/W_l36XTpFfWVVmLxdstjp1AOATc>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] [internet-drafts@ietf.org] New Version Notification for draft-hardaker-dnsop-intentionally-temporary-insec-00.txt
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 19:14:04 -0000

The most interesting informational element, in my view, would be guidance
on how to detect buggy implementations that will create this problem.  (Set
up a test zone and a test resolver and ...?).  I think the best practice is
probably to migrate to a better implementation before rolling the algorithm.

On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 1:45 PM Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> wrote:

> Ben Schwartz <bemasc=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> writes:
>
> > I also think that this is not appropriate as a Best Practice.  I would
> suggest
> > reversing this draft to make it operational guidance to implementers
> about how to
> > enable compliance with RFC 6781 Section 4.1.4.
>
> Thanks for the feedback from both of you.
>
> I think I could certainly argue it could be considered best practice
> (IE, it is best practice to update your algorithm -- it's time to move
> away from RSASHA1), and if this is the only way you can pull it off....
>
> But, let's assume we want to remove the notion of "best practice", then
> it leaves what to publish it as.  Maybe informational would leave
> everyone more comfortable?
> --
> Wes Hardaker
> USC/ISI
>